Selvarani v. The District Revenue Officer

O R D E R This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 27.03.2026 passed in Na.Ka.No.4097749/2025/Aa6 on the file of the 1st respondent, quash the same.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners claim title to the property comprised in Survey No. 322/7C, for which Patta No. 444 has been issued. It was further submitted that the property originally belonged to the father of the first petitioner by virtue of a registered Sale Deed dated 06.08.1963. After his demise in the year 1973, the petitioners, being his daughters, claimed succession to the property. The fourth respondent is the brother of the first petitioner and has also laid claim to the property. After considering the rival submissions, the first respondent passed the impugned order, observing that the patta continues to stand in the name of the first petitioner's deceased father and directing the parties to approach the competent Civil Court to establish their respective rights. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

¶3Heard the learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents 1 to 3.

¶4This Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order is legally sustainable. The authority has rightly directed the parties to approach the competent Civil Court for adjudication of their respective rights. It is an admitted fact that the father of the first petitioner died intestate in the year 1973. As regards the succession to his estate, the question whether the daughters are entitled to any share in the property, particularly by virtue of the inheritance devolving upon the mother, involves disputed questions of title which can be adjudicated only by the competent Civil Court. Unless such adjudication is made, it cannot be held that the petitioners are joint owners of the property. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order, and the same is upheld. However, it is made clear that the parties are at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court to establish their respective rights. Until such rights are determined, the patta shall continue to stand in the name of the first petitioner's father. The fourth respondent shall be at liberty to deal with the property only to the extent of his own share and shall not alienate, encumber, or otherwise deal with the share that may have devolved upon the mother for a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within the said period of eight weeks, the petitioners are directed to institute an appropriate civil suit and seek suitable interim relief, including an order of temporary injunction.

¶5In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

13.07.2026 (1/2) Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes NCC : Yes / No

msrm To

¶1The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

¶2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District.

¶3The Tahsildar, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. W.P.(MD)No.19553ooofo2026 S.SRIMATHY,oJ msrm Orderomadeoin W.P.(MD)No.19553oofo2026 andoWMP(MD).No.14460oofo2026

13.07.2026 (1/2)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.P.(MD)No.19553 of 2026 and WMP(MD).No.14460 of 2026 1. Selvarani 2. Indhrani 3. M.Manimegalai 4. M.Srividhya ... Petitioners Vs. 1. The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District. 3. The Tahsildar, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. 4. Pandiarajan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 27.03.2026 passed in Na.Ka.No.4097749/2025/Aa6 on the file of the 1st respondent, quash the same.. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Malaiyendran For Respondents : Mr.I.Pinaygash Counsel for the State fof Tamil Nadu (For R1 to R3)